R v M (2014)

A written note that flattered a 13-year-old girl, asked her to come around for “some fun” if she wanted to and stated that it was okay if she did not was not just an invitation. The words used were capable of amounting to an incitement to sexual activity. The court advised that in circumstances where […]

Read More

R v SM (2014)

There was no basis on which to extend time to allow an offender to appeal against his convictions for rape, sexual assault, and causing or inciting a four-year-old child to engage in sexual activity. Although the normal trial process had had to be modified in a number of ways because of the victim’s age, the […]

Read More

R v SEEDY TAMBEDOU (2014)

A rape victim’s evidence that she had little memory of the events was not sufficient for the judge to remove the case from the jury. There had been sufficient evidence for the jury to decide whether the victim had consented.

Read More

R v C (2013)

It had been open to a jury to be satisfied on the evidence that alleged historic child sexual abuse had continued into the period on the indictment. It was not open to the Court of Appeal to review the evidence and come to a different conclusion.

Read More

R v (1) G (2) F (2012)

In a trial concerning conspiracy to rape a child under 13, the judge, when considering a submission of no case to answer, had failed to consider whether a reasonable jury could be entitled to infer that the offenders intended to carry out the agreement. Taking the prosecution evidence at its highest, no reasonable jury could […]

Read More

R v PR (2010)

Although a judge’s summing up and jury directions could have been more detailed and better tailored to the facts, they were not so deficient as to affect the safety of a conviction for the commission of sexual offences.

Read More

R v (1) GIASH UDDIN (2) ABDUL MALIK (3) ABDUL HOQUE (2010)

Convictions for rape, kidnap and doing acts tending and intended to pervert the course of justice were safe despite a delay of several years between the allegations and the trial. The trial judge had been right to refuse a submission of no case to answer and had clearly directed the jury on the possible prejudice […]

Read More

R v ANDREW JAMES H (2007)

A judge had not erred in law in rejecting an offender’s submission of no case to answer to four counts of rape and two counts of sexual assault, all of a child aged under 13, in circumstances where, despite inconsistencies in the victim’s evidence, through the victim’s various accounts the judge had a clear basis […]

Read More